Northwest Power Products, Inc. v. Omark Industries, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
576 F.2d 83 · 1978
Citation profile
77 federal appellate · 7 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 131 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably 97 Wis. 2d 332 - Grams v. Boss (1980), Hayden v. First National Bank (1979)
77 federal appellate · 7 district · 5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 45 (§ 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914)
Relies on Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Brown Shoe Co. v. United States · Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United States · Continental Inc v. Gte Sylvania Incorporated
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 131 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“ The usual assumption is that a per se rule would grow out of a history of rule of reason cases all arriving at the same verdict.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a)n antitrust policy divorced from market considerations would lack any objective benchmarks.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the line drawn by the Pick-Barth doctrine is so vague, and the circumstances in which its application manifests any injury to competition so dependent on individual facts that it does not merit the per se characterization some of the early cases give it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.